Not Off To Such A Good Start

Is this a successful society?  Something we want to preserve?  “Nearly half of U.S. children now have at least one parent with a criminal record.” New Unemployment)

Net wealth of poor families went from around 0 to minus $15k (US CBO) https://www.cbo.gov/sites

Matt Stoller:
“I have been in rooms where these economists laugh quietly about how their models don’t work and they are pretty much making shit up.”

In 2011, Fed Reserve bankers were mocking the unemployed and using anecdotal excuses from businessmen to set policy. Federal Reserve bankers Mocked the Unemployed

Many have seen three former Treasury Sec yukking it up together on youtube about how their policies increased economic disparity.

Is anyone connecting the dots between ACA Medicaid expansion and  opioid deaths?  Connecting the dots between Big Pharma abuses and elected Dems unable to say no to their donors. A $3.00 Medicaid card prescription gets you thousands of dollars worth of Perdue Pharma’s oxy. Ever see any Congressional hearings on that?

Our Miserable 21st Century
“The warning lights have been flashing, and the klaxons sounding, for more than a decade and a half…Now that those signals are no longer possible to ignore, it is high time for experts and intellectuals to reacquaint themselves with the country in which they live and to begin the task of describing what has befallen the country in which we have lived since the dawn of the new century.”

[This is a long read.  The first part deals with economic indicators.  But I want to talk about the grassroots situation.  I have excerpted way more than normally acceptable, but hope it will be allowable given how much ground he covers. There is a lot of additional material and links in original.]

“If 21st-century America’s GDP trends have been disappointing, labor-force trends have been utterly dismal. Work rates have fallen off a cliff since the year 2000 and are at their lowest levels in decades…the exodus out of the workforce has been the big labor-market [non-]story for America’s new century. (At this writing, for every unemployed American man between 25 and 55 years of age, there are another three who are neither working nor looking for work.) Thus the “unemployment rate” increasingly looks like an antique index devised for some earlier and increasingly distant war: the economic equivalent of a musket inventory or a cavalry count…If our nation’s work rate today were back up to its start-of-the-century highs, well over 10 million more Americans would currently have paying jobs.

In our era of no more than indifferent economic growth, …trends for paid hours of work look even worse than the work rates themselves. Between 2000 and 2015, according to the BEA, total paid hours of work in America increased by just 4 percent (as against a 35 percent increase for 1985-2000, the 15-year period immediately preceding this one). Over the 2000-2015 period, however, the adult civilian population rose by almost 18 percent–meaning that paid hours of work per adult civilian have plummeted by a shocking 12 percent thus far in our new American century.

So general economic conditions for many ordinary Americans–not least of these, Americans who did not fit within the academy’s designated victim classes–have been rather more insecure than those within the comfort of the bubble understood. But the anxiety, dissatisfaction, anger, and despair that range within our borders today are not wholly a reaction to the way our economy is misfiring. On the non-material front, it is likewise clear that many things in our society are going wrong and yet seem beyond our powers to correct.

Health has been deteriorating for a significant swath of white America in our new century, thanks in large part to drug and alcohol abuse. All this sounds a little too close for comfort to the story of [1990s] Russia, with its devastating vodka- and drug-binging health setbacks.

…the Human Mortality Database, an international consortium of demographers who vet national data to improve comparability between countries, has suggested that health progress in America essentially ceased in 2012–that the U.S. gained on average only about a single day of life expectancy at birth between 2012 and 2014, before the 2015 turndown.

The dimensions of the opioid epidemic in the real America are still not fully appreciated within the bubble, where drug use tends to be more carefully limited and recreational. …”in one three-month period” just a few years ago, according to the Ohio Department of Health, “fully 11 percent of all Ohioans were prescribed opiates.” Alan Krueger, former chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers: nearly half of all prime working-age male labor-force dropouts–an army now totaling roughly 7 million men–currently take pain medication on a daily basis. [That is where pharma abuses the state and federal taxpayers through Medicaid card reimbursement. And likely contributes to underground economy.]

…What share of prime-working-age men these days are enrolled in Medicaid? According to the Census Bureau’s SIPP survey (Survey of Income and Program Participation), as of 2013, over one-fifth (21 percent) of all civilian men between 25 and 55 years of age were Medicaid beneficiaries. For prime-age people not in the labor force, the share was over half (53 percent). And for non-Hispanic white men not in the labor force of prime working age, the share enrolled in Medicaid was 48 percent.

…Of the entire un-working prime-age male Anglo population in 2013, nearly three-fifths (57 percent) were reportedly collecting disability benefits from one or more government disability program in 2013.

One forthcoming demographic study…estimates that the cohort of current and former felons in America very nearly reached 20 million by the year 2010…A little more rough arithmetic suggests that about 17 million men in our general population have a felony conviction somewhere in their CV. That works out to one of every eight adult males in America today.

We have to use rough estimates here, rather than precise official numbers, because the government does not collect any data at all on the size or socioeconomic circumstances of this population of 20 million, and never has. Amazing as this may sound and scandalous though it may be, America has, at least to date, effectively banished this huge group–a group roughly twice the total size of our illegal-immigrant population and an adult population larger than that in any state but California–to a near-total and seemingly unending statistical invisibility. Our ex-cons are, so to speak, statistical outcasts who live in a darkness our polity does not care enough to illuminate–beyond the scope or interest of public policy, unless and until they next run afoul of the law.

Social mobility has always been the jewel in the crown of the American mythos and ethos.  …according to the Census Bureau, geographical mobility in America has been on the decline for three decades, and in 2016 the annual movement of households from one location to the next was reportedly at an all-time (postwar) low. …”labor market fluidity”–the churning between jobs that among other things allows people to get ahead–has been on the decline in the American labor market for decades, with no sign as yet of a turnaround. …the odds of a 30-year-old’s earning more than his parents at the same age [might be] now just 51 percent: down from 86 percent 40 years ago.
[Strata are solidifying.]

The funny thing is, people inside the bubble are forever talking about “economic inequality,” that wonderful seminar construct, and forever virtue-signaling about how personally opposed they are to it. By contrast, “economic insecurity” is akin to a phrase from an unknown language. But if we were somehow to find a “Google Translate” function for communicating from real America into the bubble, an important message might be conveyed:

The abstraction of “inequality” doesn’t matter a lot to ordinary Americans. The reality of economic insecurity does. The Great American Escalator is broken–and it badly needs to be fixed.

Our Miserable 21st Century (Commentary Magazine)

Topline Nat. Stats Hide As Much As They Reveal

Long-needed numbers that illuminate broad and on-going national economic policy failure.  Add this to mortality rates that mirror AIDs numbers…

“Our research over the past year has found that local economies today are more divergent in terms of jobs and business growth than at any point in modern history.

EIG analyzed the presidential election results through the lens of two previous economic reports, The Distressed Communities Index and The New Map of Economic Growth and Recovery. In doing so, we found considerable evidence that the ripple effects of a weak local recovery may indeed have tipped the race in the all-important swing counties.

First and foremost, it appears that business closures helped the president-elect poach counties that had voted for President Obama twice before. Of these 209 counties, roughly 75% saw more businesses close than open from 2010 to 2014. It’s important to note that these counties ran the gamut from affluent to distressed; highly educated to below average; overwhelmingly white to majority-minority. In spite of their many differences, a decline in business dynamism is where the vast majority found common ground.

Swing Counties Faced Higher than Average Rates of Unemployment, Job Losses, and Population Decline(fladem?)…Looking more broadly than swing counties alone, we see that the urban-rural divide in this election was perhaps the starkest it has ever been.

How Struggling Economies Helped Decide the 2016 Election

The Distressed Communities Index

The New Map of Economic Growth and Recovery

Discussing the Rust Belt Vote Reality

A lot of heat and spin on this subject.  Lot of investment in getting certain answers.  

There is a LACK of teasing out the real regional numbers from general polling.  So I wanted to put some links together that get SPECIFIC.

The Myth of the Rust Belt Revolt
Relative to the 2012 election, Democratic support in the Rust Belt collapsed as a huge number of Democrats stayed home or (to a lesser extent) voted for a third party. Trump did not really flip white working-class voters in the Rust Belt. Mostly, Democrats lost them. (Me: so it was a passive/aggressive sign that “we don’t like the dog food.”)

Graph 1…the Republicans’ gain(225K) in this area was nothing compared with the Democrats’ loss of 1.17 million (-21.7 percent) voters in the same income category(<$50K).

Graph 3…Relative to 2012, Democrats lost 950K white voters in the Rust Belt 5 (-13 percent). This figure includes a loss of 770K votes cast by white men (-24.2 percent). Compare that number to the modest gains Republicans made in terms of white voters: They picked up only 450K whites (+4.9 percent).

Democrats also lost the black, indigenous, and other people of color (BIPOC) vote in the Rust Belt 5, with 400K fewer voters in this category (-11.5 percent). (Caveat: Not yet broken out by state, to allow evaluation of voter restriction effects.) But even in states with no such laws, BIPOC turnout was significantly lower this election cycle.

Conclusion… The real story–the one the pundits missed–is that voters who fled the Democrats in the Rust Belt 5 were twice as likely either to vote for a third party or to stay at home than to embrace Trump.

…compared with 2012, some 500,000 more voters chose to sit out this presidential election. In the Rust Belt, Democrats lost 1.35 million voters. Trump picked up less than half, at 590,000.  If there was a Rust Belt revolt this year, it was the voters’ flight from both parties.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/12/the_myth_of_the_rust_belt_revolt.ht
ml

fladem, could you repost your chart to this thread?  

I will be adding subsequent links that can be discussed in their own column.

Brad DeLong–Mythbuster

http://www.bradford-delong.com/2016/12/is-the-problem-one-of-insufficient-market-wages-inadequate-so
cial-insurance-polanyian-disruption-of-patterns-of-life-.html

Not normally a fan of Brad deLong, but I can appreciate his brutal attack on our comfortable myths…

“Now I think it is an open question whether it is harder to do the job via predistribution, or to do the job via changing human perceptions to get everybody to understand that:

    *no, none of us is worth what we are paid.
    *we are all living, to various extents, off of the dividends from our societal capital
    *those of us who are doing especially well are those of us who have managed to luck into situations in which we have market power–in which the resources we control are (a) scarce, (b) hard to replicate quickly, and (c) help produce things that rich people have a serious jones for right now.”

I highly recommend his piece and the Noah Smith one he includes.  Provoking some new ideas?

A Tale of Two Americas, Still

I waited to see if anyone would diary this very important piece of new research, but maybe it was overlooked.

Economic growth in the United States: A tale of two countries
by Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, Gabriel Zucman December 6, 2016
http://equitablegrowth.org/research-analysis/economic-growth-in-the-united-states-a-tale-of-two-coun
tries/

Formerly, we had no hard numbers to counteract the claims of “median” this and “median” that increases under Dem management. (Even ignoring the unadvertised change in methodology in calculating those “medians”, dear Bureau of Census.)

Also:  “…economists and policymakers do not have a comprehensive view of how government programs designed to ameliorate the worst effects of economic inequality actually affect inequality. Americans share almost one-third of the fruits of economic output (via taxes that help pay for an array of social services) through their federal, state, and local governments. … Yet we do not have a clear measure of how the distribution of pre-tax income differs from the distribution of income after taxes are levied and after government spending is taken into account. This makes it hard to assess the extent to which governments make income growth more equal.2”

Well, now we do: “In our paper, we calculate the distribution of both pre-tax and post-tax income. The post-tax series deducts all taxes and then adds back all transfers and public spending so that both pre-tax and post-tax incomes add up to national income. This allows us to provide the first comprehensive view of how government redistribution in the United States affects inequality…”

And conclude:  “…government redistribution has offset only a small fraction of the increase in pre-tax inequality. As shown in Figure 1, the average post-tax income of the bottom 50 percent of adults(117M Americans) increased by only 21 percent between 1980 and 2014, much less than average national income. This meager increase comes with two important limits.

First, there was almost no growth in real (inflation-adjusted) incomes after taxes and transfers for the bottom 50 percent of working-age adults over this period because even as government transfers increased overall, they went largely to the elderly and the middle class. Second, the small rise of the average post-tax income of the bottom 50 percent of income earners comes entirely from in-kind health transfers and public goods spending. The disposable post-tax income–including only cash transfers–of the bottom 50 percent stagnated at about $16,000. For the bottom 50 percent, post-tax disposable income and pre-tax income are similar–this group pays roughly as much in taxes as it receives in cash transfers.”

Please, read the entire paper.  It destroys the blathering and handwaving that liberals use to conceal what has been done.

Blue State Innoculations Needed

Some things that states with Blue power can do to dodge some of the worst effects of Trump policies.  Can’t start soon enough, imo.

WaPo By Steven Pearlstein December 4

Preparing for Trump Shocks

“If the Trump administration makes good on its promise to pull back on environmental regulation, states can step up their own regulation of power plant emissions and oil and gas drilling. To combat climate change, they could impose a refundable carbon tax or, as California has done, create a cap and trade system for carbon emissions.

“If Republicans repeal the Dodd-Frank financial regulations, many of those same regulations could be written into state law, either by legislatures or by state banking, securities and insurance regulators and consumer protection agencies. Taking a page from Louis Brandeis and the Progressive era, states could also provide incentives for the creation of state-chartered mutual banks, insurance and investment companies, financial institutions that are owned by their customers. The few mutuals that still exist offer competitive products and superior service at lower cost, all of it with less risk that the Wall Street mega-firms have turned finance into a head-I-win, tails-you-lose casino.

“Nobody expects a Republican Congress and White House will move to increase the federal minimum wage but there is nothing to prevent states from raising theirs. Nor is there anything preventing states from restoring within their borders many of the workers rights that the Republican Congress and President-elect Donald Trump are poised to eliminate.”

There is more…

Stop Talking About Deficits, Dems!

The Democrats have to stop attacking Republicans for running federal budget deficits. I know it’s political fun and that the Republicans are hypocritical about budget deficits. Deficits are going to be “massive” when an economy the size of the U.S. suffers a Great Recession. We have had plenty of “massive” deficits during our history under multiple political parties. None of this has ever led to a U.S. crisis. We have had some of our strongest growth while running “massive” deficits. Conversely, whenever we have adopted server austerity we have soon suffered a recession. In 1937, when FDR listened to his inept economists and inflicted austerity, the strong recovery from the Great Depression was destroyed and the economy was thrust back into an intense Great Depression.”

“As the polling data showed her losing the white working class by staggering amounts, in the last month of the election, the big new idea that Hillary pushed repeatedly was a promise that if she were elected she would inflict continuous austerity on the economy. “I am not going to add a penny to the national debt.”

One of my favorite writers, Bill Black, on what  austerity has wrought.

 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/11/bill-black-hillarys-threat-to-wage-continuous-war-on-the-work
ing-class-via-austerity-proved-fatal.html

Now it is perfectly legitimate to attack the  manner of creating those deficits (financial kleptocracy) and how empty they are of any public ownership.

It is a long read and a challenge for some to recognize the reality of his history without becoming defensive.  But pay-go should be DEAD for the immediate future.

What a clarifying essay.

By Matt Stoller
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/10/how-democrats-killed-their-populist-soul/504710
/

I want to be able to find it again and again.

“This mix of central planning and private monopoly may sound odd, but it is the intellectual underpinning of both the Affordable Care Act and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act. Although the details of both policies are influenced by a certain amount of happenstance and political give-and-take, both policies deliver social benefits through heavily concentrated private actors, which could be seen as a private form of central planning. And both laws went through committees chaired by members first elected in 1974.”  

The origins of KLUDGE.

Also interesting on the Republican reformicon side, by Phillip Longman…
http://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/novemberdecember-2016/how-to-make-conservatism-great-again/

What Kind of Dem Party Ahead?

If Republican immigration completes the transformation of the Dems into a Blue Dog party–socially liberal, economically neoliberal–can a socially liberal, economically New Deal Left attract enough voters to be competitive? Or might we have better luck abstracting working class Dems from the Blue Dog version,   articularly service workers and Millennials? A DNC party with emphasis on Blue Dog economics will be Pay-GO and Deficit Hawkery. Austerity at best, if no recession crops up. And a continuation of Bankster and Corporate Impunity that enrages the proles.

The crux, per Konczal:
“Yet any sufficiently important left project going forward is going to involve at least four things: a more redistributive state, a more aggressive state intervention in the economy, a weakening of the centrality of waged labor, and a broadening, service-based form of worker activism. These four points, essential as they are, will likely further drive Trump’s white working-class supporters away from the left, rather than unite them.” (https:/medium.com@rortybomb/would-progressive-economics-win-over-trumps-white-working-class-voter
s-43f78cc7f005#.qtuj3124z)

Dani Rodrik is more hopeful:
But there is a complementary perspective in politics that says political competition is as much about shaping those interests. The politics of ideas is about activating identities that may otherwise remain silent, altering perceptions about how the world works, and enlarging the space of what is politically feasible.

If left-liberals take for granted that the white middle class is essentially racist, hate the federal government, oppose progressive taxation, don’t think big banks and dark money are a problem … and so on, then indeed many of the remedies that progressives have to offer will fail to resonate and there is little that can be done. But why should we assume that these are the givens of political life?

A large literature in social psychology and political economy suggests that identities are malleable as are voters’ perceptions of how the world works and therefore which policies serve their interests. A large part of the right’s success derives from their having convinced lower and middle class voters that the government is corrupt and inept. Can’t progressives alter that perception? (http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2016/10/its-a-war-of-ideas-not-of-interests.html)

(Well, I would say there is a chance of making govt LESS corrupt and inept if the eye is on solving the problem and NOT creating new rents for donors through privitization schemes.)

Both of these papers are quite interesting and challenge pre-judgements.  I recommend. And don’t skip the comments.